[:: LAKERS 2014 THREAD | POLL: Who Should Coach Next Year? ::]

[grandtheftbike]

so if you were in his shoes (coaching his system) and you have players posting career highs, you don't consider that as a job well done in terms of player development? the way this sounds, you are judging the players once they leave to another coach.

kobe had a monster year compared to the last year with mb
pau displayed a better all around game as a third option
dwert never bought into the system in the first place

 

[licensed to ball]

I knew this was all going to start again with that one D'Antoni article

 

[sea manup]

players return to being scrubs after leaving the dantoni system because they are scrubs, not because dantoni didnt develop them

same thing would happen to our current bunch of guys, they're just not that good

 

[trynafeelmink]

so if you were in his shoes (coaching his system) and you have players posting career highs, you don't consider that as a job well done in terms of player development? the way this sounds, you are judging the players once they leave to another coach.

kobe had a monster year compared to the last year with mb
pau displayed a better all around game as a third option
dwert never bought into the system in the first place

Kobe had a better season simply because he was healthy and rested for a long time. and even then he pretty much scrapped most of Dantoni's system towards the end of the season when they started to win.

I simply don't agree that Pau Improved, and i don't think he does either based on his constant discontent with dantoni & Dwight didn't buy in because a good coach would find a way to play to the strength of his best players.

As far as development with him goes i don't believe putting up better numbers = Becoming a better player. He just gives guys who got very little minutes a chance to play more minutes and have no conscience on shooting the ball. The list of players that have played better under Dantoni is VERY slim when it comes to anyone who isn't a shooter.

If these players were developed into better basketball players... then they wouldn't digress drastically when no longer playing under that system. We know players aren't improving defensively playing for Dantoni, It doesn't appear that they have a much better basketball IQ, if anything he gives mediocre players more confidence to shoot and that's about where it stops.

Now let's talk these points when drafting someone who could be the face of the franchise for the next 10-15 years. Do you want his first coach to be someone who is NOTORIOUS with rarely teaching defense, doesn't hold accountability on players for taking bad shots, and has a long history of clashing with star players and airing them to the Media?

Is this the coach that you want grooming a player from the start?

I mean the List of players who have talked negative about Dantoni's style

- Kobe Bryant
- Pau Gasol
- Dwight Howard
- Carmelo Anthony
- Amare Stoudemire
- Steph Marbury

who talked positive
- Steve Nash
- Any D league dude who now has a million dollar contract

 

[CP1708]

 

[sea manup]

 

[CP1708]

Kobe Bryant and Michael Jordan also talked poorly of Phil Jackson's style and system, sooooooooooo?

 

[pmatic]

Duke's Parker cooking up a solid case for No. 1 overall spot

The latest is that Jabari Parker now may be a one-and-done at Duke to pursue his true calling as a professional dessert maker, an update from Parker himself this week after he delivered his creation of Jabari Bars, ingredients unknown, to Krzyzewskiville squatters who made camp ahead of the North Carolina game.

So apparently Parker can bake, too. That's close to everything. Scoring, rebounding, defending college centers as a projected NBA small forward at 6-foot-8 and 240 pounds, handling the ball, an advanced feel for the game for a freshman as the son of Sonny Parker, a Warriors' swingman for six seasons in the late-1970s and early-1980s. And kitchen game, with the understanding that the same batch shows up in Chapel Hill and the claims of food poisoning are nonstop.

Parker is the most complete player expected to be in the 2014 NBA Draft, if he ends up choosing that whole millionaire-athlete thing over culinary school. He's the most capable of making an immediate impact in the pros, especially on offense. He is, in the end, a safer pick than Joel Embiid, or Dante Exum coming from Australia, or Andrew Wiggins off a wobbly freshman season, or Marcus Smart as a point guard who can't distribute or shoot, or Julius Randle, who has overblown Zach Randolph comparisons.

That's also the problem. The Chicago native, from the same high school as Derrick Rose, projects to having a long and successful career, but a lot of front offices see Exum and Kansas teammates Embiid and Wiggins as having more potential. Teams like the sure thing, but some also speak of star power at No. 1, not dependability.

"Of all the guys, you could put him in an NBA game right now," one executive said. "He's not going to be an [immediate] All-Star by any stretch, but you could put him in an NBA game right now. You could put Embiid in an NBA game right now, but it would not be as seamless as Parker. [Parker] can handle the ball, he can rebound, he's physical. Embiid, he's a work in progress. You seen the progression throughout the year, how [Embiid]'s gotten better. His footwork has gotten better, his offensive moves have gotten better. He seems like a tough kid. He's been playing through injury. But Parker, offensively he can play in the NBA right now.

"Defensively, Parker plays the five most of the time for Duke. He never guards anybody on the perimeter. Is that because he can't do it or they're not asking him to do it because they rely on him on the offensive end? But there's not the ceiling with Parker like there is with a guy like Embiid or Wiggins. That's why those guys may go higher, because you're betting that those guys' athleticism is going to make them better players down the road."

So Parker would be the safe pick.

"Yeah," the exec said. "That's about right."

Athleticism is the primary concern with Parker -- it is good enough, the NBA says, but not the kind of pop preferred from a small forward who ideally will be able to create his own shot, and certainly not at the level of fellow wing Wiggins. In the best sign of all for Parker, he has been mostly in the top three, and fourth at worst, in the consensus rankings since the start of the season, without much fluctuation.

That is the other steady look as he averages 18.8 points and 9.0 rebounds in 30.2 minutes while shooting 48.3 percent, only 73.1 percent at the line, the first 30 games, with tests of the ACC and NCAA tournaments coming soon. Plus the baked goods. Very solid.

Link

 

[trynafeelmink]

View media item 863736View media item 863734View media item 863733View media item 863731View media item 863730
etc etc etc

There is a huge difference between turning 12th men into 8th men & turning role players/talented young players to starters on championship contending teams.

 

[CP1708]

Didn't Steve Nash turn into 2 time MVP from borderline all star, immediately?

Even if you disagree with those MVP's (I do) he did deserve to be in the discussion.

That's not elevating a star/franchise player????

Kobe having one of his best years in year 17 was, coincidence?

 

[rck3sactown]

random, but Dejuan Blair is only 24 

 

thought he was way older 

 

[sea manup]

None of those guys have left pops system, stephen jackson spent two early years with the spurs and his prime years were spent with other teams

I cant think of any "star" spurs players ever amounting to anything after leaving the spurs, pop must also be bad at developing players

 

[trynafeelmink]

Didn't Steve Nash turn into 2 time MVP from borderline all star, immediately?

Even if you disagree with those MVP's (I do) he did deserve to be in the discussion.

That's not elevating a star/franchise player????

Kobe having one of his best years in year 17 was, coincidence?

1) Nash style of play was a perfect matchup for the players and the style that Dantoni played. In that case yes it worked but i don't believe that after 28 yrs or so of playing basketball Dantoni magically improved his game too drastic heights.

2) I've already stated this, but i Have 0 belief that Dantoni was behind Kobe playing great last season. He was completely healthy and refreshed for the first time in years not to mention the period when the Lakers started to win and gain momentum going into the playoffs, is when Kobe and the rest of the team decided to strip down the offense and play to their strengths. They actually went away from Dantoni's offense and started to win more games.

3) the point i'm trying to get too is that if we pick up a player that is best utilized in running the break and shooting majorly from the outside he's going to look better than expected. However he will develop NOTHING on defense, Won't create new skills in his game, and be much less effective around the court because of the emphasis Dantoni places on running his system. If we can't agree on anything can we atleast agree that Dantoni is an extremely stubborn coach?

That being said unless ya'll plan on Dantoni being the coach of the Lakers for the next 10 years it would be a disservice to the overall development of our draft pick expanding his game to his maximum potential.

 

[grandtheftbike]

As far as development with him goes i don't believe putting up better numbers = Becoming a better player. He just gives guys who got very little minutes a chance to play more minutes and have no conscience on shooting the ball. The list of players that have played better under Dantoni is VERY slim when it comes to anyone who isn't a shooter.

If these players were developed into better basketball players... then they wouldn't digress drastically when no longer playing under that system. We know players aren't improving defensively playing for Dantoni, It doesn't appear that they have a much better basketball IQ, if anything he gives mediocre players more confidence to shoot and that's about where it stops.

imo, development and an increase in minutes go hand in hand. the job of a coach is to tailor his style to the capability of his players in which he struggled with when he first got to the lakers (no training camp, new system etc etc). if a player had a decent year under mda and then a struggle year with another coach, then can you really put it on the coach with whom you had a better year with?

its not just the confidence boost to shoot more. before all the injuries aside from kobe and nash's, we all noticed the ball movement was a lot better than last year, the team was a lot more fun to watch, they were competing and playing .500 ball without their star. it wasn't until they ran out of pgs, kobe injured again, paus vajayjay, X injured, etc etc did they start to lose more and more

 

[trynafeelmink]

None of those guys have left pops system, stephen jackson spent two early years with the spurs and his prime years were spent with other teams

I cant think of any "star" spurs players ever amounting to anything after leaving the spurs, pop must also be bad at developing players

I mean look you can make the illogical comparison if you want but it's clear that pop is one of the best coaches in league history, has developed players into HOF'ers, and has a million times the basketball knowledge and coaching ability of Dantoni. Not to mention Pop has been able to take on every kind of player whether perimeter, defensive, shooter, hustle guy etc and turn them to valuable pieces for his teams.... if you aren't a shooter on Dantoni's squad your pretty much deemed useless.

 

[CP1708]

emphasis Dantoni places on running his system. If we can't agree on anything can we atleast agree that Dantoni is an extremely stubborn coach?

is when Kobe and the rest of the team decided to strip down the offense and play to their strengths. They actually went away from Dantoni's offense and started to win more games.

Are you proofreading before you hit submit, or?????????

You openly say the coach, and his team, go away from his system for the betterment of the team/personnel, and then turn around and say he's stubborn and does not adjust?

He can't improve players, but bums come in and play well under him?



"The sky is not blue, it just has blue tint to it....globally"

 

[trynafeelmink]

Are you proofreading before you hit submit, or?????????

You openly say the coach, and his team, go away from his system for the betterment of the team/personnel, and then turn around and say he's stubborn and does not adjust?

He can't improve players, but bums come in and play well under him?



"The sky is not blue, it just has blue tint to it....globally"

Hmmmmm let's see... the Lakers have two of the most efficient big men in the L.... he decides he wants Pau taking threes. They play losing ball for about 50 games despite quickly seeing that there play was ineffective and players complaining from early on.... Rather then noticing this within the first 15-20 it takes THE PLAYERS to completely change the offense

“When you have the two best passers at their respective positions, they need to be the guys that have the ball the majority of the time,” Bryant said. “Myself and Dwight [Howard], we’re finishers. I think that’s how it should operate.”

Dantoni response is this( Mind you this is in January already)

We talked about it to get him more involved,” D’Antoni said. “But I go back to how I coach this way, whether it’s right or wrong. But I do know that the ball finds energy. If you have energy, you put yourself in every play. I’m not saying you can’t post up. But I want you to pick and roll and go. If you do that, spread out and get it down there, you’ll get it.”

Hmmm so your losing terribly 3/4 all star players are telling you that they believe the offense has to change...... and your reponse is i hear you and i know hwere losing, but i coach the way i wanna coach even though it's clearly wrong.

He said that too a guy who's gonna go down as a top 10 player all time, and two perennial All-stars.... so do you believe that if a rookie is having trouble within the offense or realizes he's not utilizing his strengths, do you think Dantoni is going to make an attempt to ::Gasp:: help his player become better.

 

[CP1708]

Not to mention Pop has been able to take on every kind of player whether perimeter, defensive, shooter, hustle guy etc and turn them to valuable pieces for his teams....

Smartest thing you've said all day. I was seconds away from blocking you, now I might keep you around a little longer.

Lemme ask ya,

2006-07, Phil Jackson (known for defense, yes?) has one of the worst defenses in the NBA.
Mike D'Antoni, (not known for defense as you claim, yes?) has one in the middle of the NBA, ie, BETTER than Phil Jackson's Lakers.

Why?


Did Mike suddenly coach defense better that year? Did Phil NOT teach defense better that year? In fact, what exactly do those two head coaches actually "teach" during practice, in terms of defensively?

That year, Mike's team kicked the living piss out of the Lakers in the first round, beating Phil's Lakers for the 2nd year in a row.


My point.

You can say Mike D'Antoni is this, or that. Doesn't coach defense (per you, cuz you witness every practice and team meeting I assume) and you can say he's stubborn, or dumb, or whatever you want to call him. That is fine. But what you can't do, is produce a better coach than him, that is available to us.

No Phil, no Pop, no Thibbs, no Carlisle, no Spolestra, no Pat Riley, no Jeff Van Gundy, etc etc etc etc etc.

Therefore,

What purpose does it serve to DOWNGRADE at coach?

What benefit is it, to have a FOURTH coach in five years?

Why make the players go from one system, to another system, to another system, in the span of 26 months?

How does it help this franchise, to develop these "scrubs" that we have, build them up, get them playing better (for them) only to then force them to learn ANOTHER new system?

I ask you, how does that help the LA Lakers?

Stop crying about the ******* guy, and tell me how going to a coach that is no better, with no better track record, and changing the whole system, again, and STILL, not knowing whether we're going to have a solid roster next year, a terrible roster next year, a great roster next year, etc. Tell me how any of that helps us?


The point of 2006-07 was this, Mike had better players than Phil did, that's why he had a better defense, and a better team. The point obviously being, better players, better results. Mike won like 240 something games in 4 years, he coached just fine in Phoenix, he merely had some bad luck with roster shaping/Stern, etc. Get him better players, he'll get better results. Same as Phil, the very next year getting Fisher, Ariza, and Pau, and suddenly the Lakers were better in 2008, than they were in 2007.

Changing the coach doesn't mean anything, if we don't get better players. Swapping out coaches every year is nothing but painting walls in a house that's already sinking. Waste of damn time.

Get him players, let them grow in the system, see if the wins don't start to follow in time.

The roster is the most important thing, not the coach. If you find an upgrade at coach, such as Thibbs quits his job with the Bulls, then we can talk. As of now, that isn't an option, so there's no point trying to clip Mike.

 

[trynafeelmink]

Smartest thing you've said all day. I was seconds away from blocking you, now I might keep you around a little longer.

Lemme ask ya,

2006-07, Phil Jackson (known for defense, yes?) has one of the worst defenses in the NBA.
Mike D'Antoni, (not known for defense as you claim, yes?) has one in the middle of the NBA, ie, BETTER than Phil Jackson's Lakers.

Why?


Did Mike suddenly coach defense better that year? Did Phil NOT teach defense better that year? In fact, what exactly do those two head coaches actually "teach" during practice, in terms of defensively?

That year, Mike's team kicked the living piss out of the Lakers in the first round, beating Phil's Lakers for the 2nd year in a row.


My point.

You can say Mike D'Antoni is this, or that. Doesn't coach defense (per you, cuz you witness every practice and team meeting I assume) and you can say he's stubborn, or dumb, or whatever you want to call him. That is fine. But what you can't do, is produce a better coach than him, that is available to us.

No Phil, no Pop, no Thibbs, no Carlisle, no Spolestra, no Pat Riley, no Jeff Van Gundy, etc etc etc etc etc.

Therefore,

What purpose does it serve to DOWNGRADE at coach?

What benefit is it, to have a FOURTH coach in five years?

Why make the players go from one system, to another system, to another system, in the span of 26 months?

How does it help this franchise, to develop these "scrubs" that we have, build them up, get them playing better (for them) only to then force them to learn ANOTHER new system?

I ask you, how does that help the LA Lakers?

Stop crying about the ******* guy, and tell me how going to a coach that is no better, with no better track record, and changing the whole system, again, and STILL, not knowing whether we're going to have a solid roster next year, a terrible roster next year, a great roster next year, etc. Tell me how any of that helps us?


The point of 2006-07 was this, Mike had better players than Phil did, that's why he had a better defense, and a better team. The point obviously being, better players, better results. Mike won like 240 something games in 4 years, he coached just fine in Phoenix, he merely had some bad luck with roster shaping/Stern, etc. Get him better players, he'll get better results. Same as Phil, the very next year getting Fisher, Ariza, and Pau, and suddenly the Lakers were better in 2008, than they were in 2007.

Changing the coach doesn't mean anything, if we don't get better players. Swapping out coaches every year is nothing but painting walls in a house that's already sinking. Waste of damn time.

Get him players, let them grow in the system, see if the wins don't start to follow in time.

The roster is the most important thing, not the coach. If you find an upgrade at coach, such as Thibbs quits his job with the Bulls, then we can talk. As of now, that isn't an option, so there's no point trying to clip Mike.

Here's the difference between me and you i don't think Dantoni is a good coach AT ALL. Doesn't matter how much talent we have next year because once we build enough and it time to go compete for a championship.... HE WILL NOT GET IT DONE.

So why not take a chance on a new coach and see what happens. Rather then waste time keeping him and changing systems 2-3 years down the line. My biggest concern is that he is going to absolutely stunt the growth of any player that we pick up in this draft. This guy thinks that he's somehow a superstar, and that he should be talking to the media like one of them. He's a selfish coach and he has this delusion that his system is somehow great.

The dude has been pissing off top tier talent and throwing them under the bus since Phoenix, do you think that's conducive to attracting FA? (Unless It's L.Love because lord knows dantoni will wet his pants telling him to launch 3's at a guards rate)

Aren't you the guy always in here talking about how every year w/o a chip is a failure... well keep Dantoni and prepare for failure every single year

 

[CP1708]

Yeah, you don't get it. That's cool.

I tried at least.

Good news for you and the rest of the fanbase is you'll probably get your way and we'll downgrade at coach, waste another couple years, blame the new coach, fire him, start over, fire that coach, it'll be a wonderful fanbase driven circle jerk. Congrats to you all.

 

[darthska]

Yeah, you don't get it. That's cool.

I tried at least.

Good news for you and the rest of the fanbase is you'll probably get your way and we'll downgrade at coach, waste another couple years, blame the new coach, fire him, start over, fire that coach, it'll be a wonderful fanbase driven circle jerk. Congrats to you all.

And he will get picked up by someone.

And... do nothing significant.

Buncha lobs. High scoring games.

Still nothing.

Much ado, though.

 

[pmatic]

Jordan Famar injured his groin today.

Both and |I

 

[grandtheftbike]

farmar's turn to be on that plan

 

[teamlakers909]

I can't believe people are defending 'Antoni.

Also whoever said to punt the next two seasons is a GENIUS.


FINALLY, Kobe needs to shut up before Mitch panics to please Kobe and trades our first round pick for someone we could sign in a year anyways. Or worse, overpay for overrated Deng.

 

[essential1]

I can't believe people are defending 'Antoni.

Also whoever said to punt the next two seasons is a GENIUS.


FINALLY, Kobe needs to shut up before Mitch panics to please Kobe and trades our first round pick for someone we could sign in a year anyways. Or worse, overpay for overrated Deng.

He is a good coach.

And I was the one who said that.